Framing, Reframing & Systems Thinking

Framing and Reframing

If you put on a telephoto lens, you’re going to see something quite different to what you would see through a wide-angle lens

When people are in meetings, they usually come from a particular place or discipline, and they are caught in that way of looking at things

Example of reframing:

Tell me about the problems you are having in your organisation.

Stop! We don’t have problems here, we have only challenges.

Reframing: moved from a negative to ways to empower the organisation

What is a frame? Do we know what our frames are?

By default, we look at a situation, and we try and we try and make sense.

There’s so much information that you can’t make sense unless you apply a frame

How do I use someone else’s frame?

Often, there are questions about “who is responsible?” or “who is to blame?”

We must replace the “blame frame”. Change to a learning or discovery frame.

This is a big aspect of why teams don’t find solutions

The Story of George Washington Bridge

Background:

The George Washington Bridge is one of the major arteries of traffic into the city of New York from the west

It’s always a bottleneck, even when traffic is flowing smoothly

When there’s problems or accidents, the bottleneck becomes a complete standstill, which is a serious issue for life all around the city

This story is about barriers, in more ways than one

It’s the middle of the 1970’s. Usually, about once a month, there’s a head-on collision on the bridge

Stakeholders:

The nearest hospital is Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center. All the staff work very hard to save the lives of the victims of these crashes

No matter what the hospital staff do to improve their service, the accidents still happen. They’re not preventing accidents from happening.

the police, law enforcement, the Port Authority

Looked to prevent accidents through the enforcement of laws

the maintenance departments

Looked to prevent accidents ensuring the paint the double-yellow lines was fresh, using glow in the dark paint

These groups are also working to improve their ability to prevent accidents.

They do not prevent the accidents

Everyone is doing their part to improve their area of responsiblity, but the system isn’t really changing, and the accidents still happen.

Until….

Everyone steps back from their part of the problem, and thinks about the system as a whole

When they do that, new innovative breakthroughs and solutions are possible

As you think about the whole problem, it’s possible to think about solutions that prevent all accidents from happening so there are zero defects (no accidents at all)

The solution (in this case) happened to be concrete barriers

A solution was devised that dissolved the problem. Not just solved it, but made it disappear. This is an important breakthrough!

Why did it take so long? Why do people take so long to find solutions?

The barriers were invented in 1959, but weren’t installed until 1975.

The stakeholders were approaching the problem from their own frames.

They were looking at their part of the problem, not the whole problem

For example, the medical team was more focused on enhancing patient services, rather than thinking about how to prevent these accidents happening in the first place

What if I could figure out how to look at the problem from a different angle? Use a different lens?

The barriers on the bridge are the solution

The barriers in peoples minds prevent us from reaching the solution much sooner

We take these complicated, complex problems that are difficult to get our hands on, and we break them up into pieces.

Then it’s easier to work in that limited area, but connecting these areas is the hard part

That’s where the problems lie, connecting the different areas of responsibility

This is why the reframing aspect whole system is important

Cross Functional Team Designing a Rewards Program

Each team member had their own department heads

Functions were siloed, and very hard to get a meeting together when needed

There were conflicts over priorities and goals

Team members were not able to understand the other persons’ perspective (or frames)

Decisions got delayed, project timelines were impacted

How to get the teams unstuck?

Frames – Defined and Illustrated

Frames are determined by multiple factors. For example,

a person’s discipline

field of study

role

For example,

If an economist looks at a team working, they might ask “what is their economic incentive for participating in this team?”

If a sociologist looks at they same team, they might ask “what are the demographics of the team, and how do they influence what’s happening?”

Frames for this course:

Group, or organisation, or system as a whole

Connect with group literature that has been around for over 100 years

Look at the issue of scapegoating

Look at the dynamics of the group or team, and not blaming one individual or group (avoid the blame game)

Scenario – Computer Manufacturing Company

Company makes computers that they sell to other businesses, who then sell them on the retail market

Now they’re contemplating marketing and producing a product of their own to sell on the retail market

Design engineers keen for a new creative

Finance sees opportunity

Pressure to reduce production costs or else lose business

Groups are having trouble with seeing from other perspectives

They’ve already had 2 2-hour meetings

Noticed that the camera angle is changing often, which I assume is an example of changing frames

At the end of the third meeting

Senior finance person:

hasn’t see projections.

If the finances aren’t there, the project isn’t there

IT Design Engineer:

team is really excitied.

Aside: (I’ve been waiting years to launch our own product line. But the meeting is very disappointing. I don’t think my colleages see the potential here)

I’m hiring new people every day. If we don’t give them something to do, we’re going to lose them

Production Manager:

We’re maxed out already. We’re talking about creating a whole new line. If we hire new staff, I think we can manage it

Aside: (I am about to lose 4 people, two are my best line people. If those 2 go, 3 more will also go. They’re not happy. They don’t like the wages or the hours. I’m worried that we’re going to lose them)

Finance:

we’re going to have to reduce costs. Everyone is going to have to reach an accomodation.

Senior Marketing Person:

It’s the launch of a new product.

There’s not way that we can launch this the ways are configured now.

Something has to be sacrificed

Aside: (I have an entire staff who doesn’t know how to launch a new product. This is a complete marketing overhaul, and I need a bigger budget. I need to get in more people, get existing people up to speed. I can’t see how to do this in 9 months)

I don’t feel that this group understands how competitive the retail market is.

I worry that we’re going to burst into the market, and have our pants down

Production:

It’s a grand plan, but people cannot work any faster

I’m worried about burn out and possible accidents

Head of Legal and Contracts

Before we consider staffing, we need to consider legal issues

We have a contractual obligation to our customers

If we use existing technology to create a new product, we could be sued

Finance:

We’ve discussed this before. We have not signed any contracts which prevents us from making a new product

Legal:

Aside: (This is a bad idea. Clearly none of them are concerned about the legal ramifications. If we get sued, we’ll get stuck in the courts for years. We’re not financially ready to do that, it could really affect our bottom line).

Finance:

Aside: (This is the scond project that I have worked on where no one sems to be concerned about budget. If they have any more massive overruns like last time, my reputation is on the line)

I’m worried about the overhead here

Our margins are so bad that we’re going to be losing money in 6 months

Production:

chef analogy with bad tools

Debrief – Scenario

Everyone was stuck in their frame. They had a hard time looking outside of the frame

Legal

She was only focussed on the risks involve in the new business opportunity

Not considering the cost pressures the organisation is facing, or the market realities they might have to face later

Seemed convinced that the entire project was a train wreck

She was not willing, or not aware of the bigger picture

From the scene, you could see that they were stuck. Every member was acting out a part of staying within the straightjacket of their role

We start to identify with each character, and what they’re saying as though it’s about their personality or the way they are, rather than what they’re representing in the organisation. This is a mistake we often make

They explored this framing effect in a hypothetical life or death situation

Participants in the study were asked to choose between different programs to combat the outbreak of a deadly disease which could affet 600 lives

Choice was given as either a positive frame (how many people will live) or a negative frame (how many people will die)

72% of participants chose the program with the positive framing

Only 22% chose the same program when presented with negative framing

Both the problems were identical

The difference was in the outcomes, which was described as either saving lives versus the number of lives lost

Discussion Prompt: Assignment 1 – Experiential Exercise

Four different frames

Innovative architect

Health & safety expert

Disabled person in a wheel chair

5 year old kid

Debrief – Experiential Activity

There are things that we pass every day that we don’t notice. However, when we change our frame, these things come into the forefront.

The exercise gives us permission to change frames. But it is very easy to do.

What are ways that I can frame my questions so that the person I’m asking understands that I’m coming from a different frame

Changing frame

I wonder how our customers would view the issue?

I wonder how legal would view this issue?

What if the computer manufactor meeting started with a discussion of the changing market scenario, and the cost pressures faced by the organisation. That probably would have changed the dialog, and help participants to come out of their rames.

Framing and Reframing can unblock learning in teams

Explict reframing:

“Take off your management hat, and put on your customer hat”

Call attention to to we’re looking at it and ask how to reshape that, reframe that

This chapter presents a conceptual refiguration of action-research based on a “sociorationalist” view of science. The position that is developed can be summarized as follows: For action-research to reach its potential as a vehicle for social innovation it needs to begin advancing theoretical knowledge of consequence; that good theory may be one of the best means human beings have for affecting change in a postindustrial world; that the discipline’s steadfast commitment to a problem-solving view of the world acts as a primary constraint on its imagination and contribution to knowledge; that appreciative inquiry represents a viable complement to conventional forms of action-research; and finally, that through our assumptions and choice of method we largely create the world we later discover.

The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981)

The psychological principles that govern the perception of decision problems and the evaluation of probabilities and outcomes produce predictable shifts of preference when the same problem is framed in different ways. Reversals of preference are demonstrated in choices regarding monetary outcomes, both hypothetical and real, and in questions pertaining to the loss of human lives. The effects of frames on preferences are compared to the effects of perspectives on perceptual appearance. The dependence of preferences on the formulation of decision problems is a significant concern for the theory of rational choice.

Systems Thinking Frame

When attending a meeting, we must represent our own frame. However, it is also important that we adopt and listen, and take on other frames. Systems thinking is all about that.

Analytical thinking: separate something into parts, understand the parts, and then see how the parts fit together

Systems thinking (as opposed to our analytical framing) asks us to do something else. Take the part we are trying to explain, and see how that works in a larger system.

Metaphor for Systems Thinking: Concentric Circles

Example of car:

You can pull a car apart and understand all the individual pieces.

However, you won’t understand why it is the size it is, or why the size has changed since the 50’s.

Instead of viewing the car as a transportation machine, think of it as something to move families.

You only understand that when you think about the car’s role in society.

Example of education:

School classes, 1 teacher, 20-30 children.

Why that configuration?

Need systems thinking to answer:

What is this preparing them to do?

What is being taught?

What role does that play?

When we want to get the purpose, we need the systems thinking piece

Getting rid of a problem does not necessarily led to what you want

Is thinking about the system as a whole too much information?

It’s a different set of questions that we’re asking

If you’re really trying to understand purpose and possibility, that’s a different space

Discovery space: not about getting rid of problems, but formulating problems in such as way that we can see possibilities that were not clear before

By thinking of a goal and working backwards, we may avoid the constraints that block us going forward

Analysis and synthesis

Example:

People leaving a group

Was told this was because of monetary compensation

In the larger system, compensation is only part of the rewards system

What are the various monetary and non-monetary rewards?

Considering the system rather than individualising issues or problems

Win/Lose frame

If I give you something, I have to take something away from someone else